Privatization of water

This is just insane…

http://articles.latimes.com/2009/mar/18/nation/na-contested-rainwater18

DENVER — Every time it rains here, Kris Holstrom knowingly breaks the law.

Holstrom’s violation is the fancifully painted 55-gallon buckets underneath the gutters of her farmhouse on a mesa 15 miles from the resort town of Telluride. The barrels catch rain and snowmelt, which Holstrom uses to irrigate the small vegetable garden she and her husband maintain.

But according to the state of Colorado, the rain that falls on Holstrom’s property is not hers to keep. It should be allowed to fall to the ground and flow unimpeded into surrounding creeks and streams, the law states, to become the property of farmers, ranchers, developers and water agencies that have bought the rights to those waterways.

What Holstrom does is called rainwater harvesting. It’s a practice that dates back to the dawn of civilization, and is increasingly in vogue among environmentalists and others who pursue sustainable lifestyles. They collect varying amounts of water, depending on the rainfall and the vessels they collect it in. The only risk involved is losing it to evaporation. Or running afoul of Western states’ water laws.

Those laws, some of them more than a century old, have governed the development of the region since pioneer days.

“If you try to collect rainwater, well, that water really belongs to someone else,” said Doug Kemper, executive director of the Colorado Water Congress. “We get into a very detailed accounting on every little drop.”

Frank Jaeger of the Parker Water and Sanitation District, on the arid foothills south of Denver, sees water harvesting as an insidious attempt to take water from entities that have paid dearly for the resource.

“Every drop of water that comes down keeps the ground wet and helps the flow of the river,” Jaeger said. He scoffs at arguments that harvesters like Holstrom only take a few drops from rivers. “Everything always starts with one little bite at a time.”

Increasingly, however, states are trying to make the practice more welcome. Bills in Colorado and Utah, two states that have limited harvesting over the years, would adjust their laws to allow it in certain scenarios, over the protest of people like Jaeger.

Organic farmers and urban dreamers aren’t the only people pushing to legalize water harvesting. Developer Harold Smethills wants to build more than 10,000 homes southwest of Denver that would be supplied by giant cisterns that capture the rain that falls on the 3,200-acre subdivision. He supports the change in Colorado law.

We believe there is something to rainwater harvesting," Smethills said. “We believe it makes economic sense.”

Collected rainwater is generally considered “gray water,” or water that is not reliably pure enough to drink but can be used to water yards, flush toilets and power heaters. In some states, developers try to include a network of cisterns and catchment pools in every subdivision, but in others, those who catch the rain tend to do so covertly.

In Colorado, rights to bodies of water are held by entities who get preference based on the dates of their claims. Like many other Western states, Colorado has more claims than available water, and even those who hold rights dating back to the late 19th century sometimes find they do not get all of the water they should.

“If I decide to [take rainwater] in 2009, somewhere, maybe 100 miles downstream, there’s a water right that outdates me by 100 years” that’s losing water, said Kevin Rein, assistant state engineer.

State Sen. Chris Romer found out about this facet of state water policy when he built his ecological dream house in Denver, entirely powered by solar energy. He wanted to install a system to catch rainwater, but the state said it couldn’t be permitted.

“It was stunning to me that this common-sense thing couldn’t be done,” said Romer, a Democrat. He sponsored a bill last year to allow water harvesting, but it did not pass.

“Welcome to water politics in Colorado,” Romer said. “You don’t touch my gun, you don’t touch my whiskey, and you don’t touch my water.”

Romer and Republican state Rep. Marsha Looper introduced bills this year to allow harvesting in certain circumstances. Armed with a study that shows that 97% of rainwater that falls on the soil never makes it to streams, they propose to allow harvesting in 11 pilot projects in urban areas, and for rural users like Kris Holstrom whose wells are depleted by drought.

In contrast to the high-stakes maneuvering in the capital, Holstrom looks upon the state’s regulation of rainwater with exasperated amusement.

Holstrom, director of sustainability for Telluride, and her husband, John, have lived on their farm since 1988. During the severe drought at the start of this decade, their well began drying up. Placing rain barrels under the gutters was the natural thing to do, said Holstrom, 51.

“Rain out here comes occasionally, and can come really hard,” she said. “To be able to store it for when you need it is really great.”

Holstrom had a vague awareness of state regulations. She decided to test it last summer when she was teaching a class on water harvesting. She called the state water department, which told her it was technically illegal, though it was unlikely that she would be cited.

Holstrom is known in southwestern Colorado for a lifestyle and causes that many deem quixotic. The land she and her husband own holds a yurt and tepees to house “interns” who help on their organic farm in the summers. It boasts a greenhouse, which even on a recent snowy day held an oasis of rosemary, artichokes, salad greens and a fig tree.

She plucked a bit of greens from one plant and munched on it as goldfish swam in a small, algae-filled pond that helps heat the enclosure. “This has been my passion for a long time – trying to live the best way I know how,” she said.

Water is shaping up to be the new oil…

http://www.corpwatch.org/article.php?id=6670

http://www.cbc.ca/news/features/water/bolivia.html

http://www.newyorker.com/archive/2002/04/08/020408fa_FACT1

The first article is absolute and utter bullshit, especially the bolded quote.
I’d suggest posting the link to the first article in that post.

done.

i agree, its hard to believe. truth is stranger than fiction.


I remember seeing that article when it came out (March '09). I wonder if they’ve changed any of the laws since then.

Wouldn’t a better thread label be “Collectivization of Water”? Since the water boards (not to be confused with waterboards) are stating that it belongs to all of the state’s populace and that they are the ones chosen to represent the people in regards to this resource.

Utah has dumb laws like this too. I think the land owners ought to charge the water rights holders an access fee for the water to cross their property or something like that. Instead they charge the homeowner a water runoff charge.

A car dealership here in Utah wanted to catch the rain water to use in its car wash facility but got dinged by the law.

Total BS

Wow … that is totally FUBAR’d.

Ah the wonderful smell of corruption. Can’t make more money? Just get a politician to make laws to protect you so you can both share the spoils.

No one owns water.

You have to have some way to adjudicate disputes on water use. Should someone higher up on the river have the right to divert so much water into their fields that you get just a trickle? Those kinds of questions. So bodies of law surrounding “water rights” arose. Eastern states generally have a law that the owner of the land has the rights to the water on that land. Western states generally do it differently, based on their heritage of pioneering and no one owning most of the land…

I agree that what we see is dumb, but it grew out of a need that goes back 150 years or more to adjudicate water rights.

I would seriously like to see someone try and charge a water rights holder for damage to their property from rain damage or a passage fee for rain water passing over their land. It would bring to the fore how dumb these sorts of things are. Hey, these people claim the water belongs to them so get it off my land!

It’s not the water you should be able to own or pay for, it’s the service of bringing the water to you. If you have a well on your property you should not be oppressed by the government to give money to other people for it. Then it is theft.

It is not a question of having a well (well it could be but in general isn’t – water rights are complicated – owning the land out west does not mean you have the right to drill a well but if you already have the well then you probably own water rights). It is water from rivers, streams, rainwater, etc that is the focus of this.

However, why should it not be the water you own or pay for? Water is a tangible physical object.

As is air.

And, your point? water is a lot easier to corral and keep track of than air. And air is not in limited supply and does not cause disputes about access to air (now keeping the air clean does)

And you can buy air and various gases that make up air.

that is just dumb. if its my land, i should own everything own that land. and that means i should have the right to drill a well on my land if i so choose.

thats like saying, “hey, we know this is your land that you bought and paid for, but unfortunately for you we have the rights to all the dirt.”

prove to me that rainwater i collect came from your water.

Having grown up in the midwest, where we worried more about flooding than drought (can you really drain Lake Michigan?), it was hard for me to wrap my head around water out here in Colorado.

They build bridges over dry land that is called a river, because it flows, sometimes.

It would be interesting in that while modern suburbia uses more processed water, it also sheds more rain water due to pavement and drainage.

You can talk about a cistern, but the real bandit is evaporation. Sweet walk-on-water Jesus water evaporates fast here, with the low humidity and air pressure. Snow seems to sublimate since it evaporates as fast as it melts.

Water here is like parking in Manhattan.

Whenever I’m on the other side of the divide, I always try to pee in a stream. Your welcome California!!

Yes, the water rights thing is horrible. None of you should move out here unless you want to desicate!

I personally agree with you. However, that is not how it works. There is also the concept of “mineral rights”

On the east coast it does work the way you and I think it should. Not out here in the water poor and dry air fast evaporation west.

thats like saying, “hey, we know this is your land that you bought and paid for, but unfortunately for you we have the rights to all the dirt.”

google “mineral rights” as well

prove to me that rainwater i collect came from your water.

Don’t have to. Water rights generally works on the basis of how much you can take.

I agree with the “this is dumb” sentiment.

I do not agree with the idea that water should be free however.

Frank Jaeger of the Parker Water and Sanitation District, on the arid foothills south of Denver, sees water harvesting as an insidious attempt to take water from entities that have paid dearly for the resource.

roflmao

And the homeowners/land owners didn’t pay dearly? Trying to charge for rain is just damn stupid, now if you were dropping a well to bottle water and ship it away so much that you influenced the aquifer, well I can see that. These people aren’t transporting it away though, they’re just influencing when it hits the ground so their plants etc can grow better or wash, flush in between the rain periods. I am vehemently against piping the great lakes to outlying states though, that’s just a crock of shit. They’d suck these damn lakes dry. Maybe my knowledge of how much this can potentially influence the aquifer out west is faulty, but I suspect not, again they’re not shpping the water out of state or something like that, just it’s pattern of hitting the ground.